I’m no expert on criminology, or the justice and prison systems, so maybe there’s something I’m missing, there probably is, or at least I hope there is. But I do not understand the logic of concurrent sentences. Every time I read or hear about another judge handing out sentences for multiple offenses that are to run all at the same time, I’m reminded of what seems a miscarriage of justice. Although it sure seems like a good deal for the convicted, or the bean counters of prisons that save money from shorter incarcerations. I repeat, maybe there’s some good reason for this that I’ve just never heard explained. But I don’t get it.
Commit a bunch of crimes and get a bunch of sentences, but if they run concurrently, it’s like there was only one crime committed, the one with the longest sentence. All the other shorter-sentenced crimes seem rather moot. On the person’s record, but what good does it do? If the judge deems prison time the correct consequence for each offense, how is it right to not have to serve all of the sentences, one after the other?
A semantic side note, but doesn’t the commonly used term ‘concurrently’ sound less offensive than the synonym ‘simultaneously’ or just saying ‘at the same time’? Since we don’t hear the word ‘concurrent’ as often, it almost seems easier to forget what it really means and refers to.
viagra shops in india Some people may have certain health conditions that make these tablets unsuitable for them. So, the both medicine will act similarly that the generic cialis More Info does. cialis is the medicine that is working its way through the body. Taken orally, it can cause a manifold increase in your sexual session ranging between free viagra without prescription 4-6 hours. So trust us, they want your business. buy generic cialis
If the same convicted person had committed the multiple offenses at different times, crime by crime, then he’d have had his punishment meted out crime by crime too. Why should someone get a break just because he or she decided to go all out and commit a whole bunch of crimes all at once?
It’s like a 2-for-1 special or something. Commit two crimes and only be punished for the worse one. Or maybe it’s like buying one at the regular price and getting two free. In effect, just serve the longest sentence and get the rest for free, or should I say, go free for the rest. Because that’s the equivalent of what happens. It’s like those other crimes never happened, at least to whoever committed them. Not so much, for the victims or the rest of society, who concurrently scratch their bewildered heads.
